%Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2016

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Soybean Iron Chlorosis Project 2001 Summary Report AGVISE Laboratories Benson, MN & Northwood, ND.
Advertisements

Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county of the sample. This data.
1. Name the salt made when these react… Magnesium + sulfuric acid 
Agronomic Value of Nutrients in Biosolids Randall Warden A & L Great Lakes Laboratories Fort Wayne, IN Quality Analyses for Informed Decisions.
PHOSPHORUS UPTAKE BY SILAGE CORN IN SOUTHERN IDAHO Amber Moore, Steve Hines, Brad Brown, Mario de Haro Marti, Christi Falen, Mireille Chahine, Tianna Fife,
Current Nitrogen Fertilization Strategies for Corn in Nebraska Richard Ferguson Bob Caldwell.
Sharpen for Sunflower Desiccation
Glasgow Area Chamber of Commerce And Agriculture New Trends in Agriculture Glasgow, MT January, 12, 2011.
Sorghum Fertility Brian Arnall Oklahoma State University Dept Plant and Soil Sciences.
What is the purpose of this presentation? n Provide a better understanding of site specific yield information and the value that it can bring to your.
Amber Moore, Ph.D. University of Idaho. Collected to represent Conservation Management Unit Time allowed between sampling and planting (Code 590) Within.
Soil Testing Procedures for Biologically Based Systems Raymond C. Ward Ward Laboratories, Inc Kearney, Nebraska
 Errors or differences in Soil samples ◦ Collection method > laboratory ◦ Environment > laboratory  Field Variability ◦ Composite sample no matter area.
Precision Farming Profitability Reference C: Soil Sampling and Analysis By Sylvie Brouder, Mark Morgan.
Importance of Soil Testing
Soil Sampling and Nutrient Recommendations Soil Education Short Course.
Secondary and Micronutrient Management
AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory % Grid or Zone Samples Tested Compared To Total Number of Samples Tested.
Correlations of Soil and Hay Micronutrients Purpose: Is there a correlation between soil micronutrients and those in the hay crop?
Acids… Learning objectives: Know that salts are formed from reactions with acids. Know how to write correct word equations. Know what salts are formed.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county of the sample. This data.
Crop Compare Dwight Aakre, Farm Management Specialist Andy Swenson, Farm & Family Resource Management Specialist.
Minnesota Fertility Research & Funding Sources. Sugarbeet Research & Education Board Average Funding Research Type Fertility$189,000 Weed$84,667.
West Hills College Farm of the Future The Precision-Farming Guide for Agriculturalists Chapter Four Soil Sampling and Analysis.
Managing Micronutrients with Soil (Plant) Testing and Fertilizer.
AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county of the sample. This data.
J OURNAL #72 How many moles of compound are there in 6.00g of ammonium sulfate? How many molecules are there in 20.0g sulfuric acid?
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Understanding Soil Test Results and Fertilizer Recommendations
Micronutrients Gordon Johnson, Bill Raun, Hailin Zhang Department of Plant and Soil Sciences Oklahoma State University Gordon Johnson, Bill Raun, Hailin.
Soil Fertility Impacting Soil Health Ray Ward Ward Laboratories Inc. Kearney, NE “Guiding Producers.
SOIL SAMPLING Dr. Dave Franzen Extension Soil Specialist North Dakota State University.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Figure 1. Rodale Farming Systems Trial with rotations. Note the presence of cover crops and amendment in organic systems. Synthetic fertilizer herbicide.
Bob Woods Area Extension Agronomy Specialist
MWEA Biosolids Conference
Soil Fertility in Muskogee County
Grid Soil sampling.
Soil Testing and Fertiliser Application
Agronomy Research Program
Dilution and Reactions of Acids
PERCENT COMPOSITION SCH3U.
Thank you for choosing AGVISE Laboratories
Evaluation of Pre-Side Dress Nitrate Test for Corn in Minnesota
Soil Fertility for Wine Grapes
%Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2017
Precision Nutrient Management: Grid-Sampling Basis
Agronomic Spatial Variability and Resolution
Soil Long-term Nutrient Dynamics A Farm Experience in Brazil
Soil test results and how to use them
Nutrient Deficiencies
Agronomic Spatial Variability and Resolution
Thank you for choosing AGVISE Laboratories
Annual SCN Summary for 2015 AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county.
Annual SCN Summary for 2018 AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county.
Agronomic Spatial Variability and Resolution
%Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2014
Agronomic Spatial Variability and Resolution
Agronomic Spatial Variability and Resolution
Grid Sampling: Point vs. Random
%Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2016
Annual SCN Summary for 2016 AGVISE Laboratories summarized Soybean Cyst Nematode (SCN) levels on a regional basis, based upon the zip code region or county.
Brian Arnall Oklahoma State University Dept Plant and Soil Sciences
Nutritional Issues in Caneberries
Presentation transcript:

Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples

%Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2016

AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory 1997 - 2016 % Grid or Zone Samples Tested Compared To Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples Tested

Average Soil Nitrate following Wheat in 2016 MB Fall 2016 Samples 37 36 (lb/a 0-24” samples) 37 32 45 19 45 39 43 30 34 38 36 36 ND 60 43 45 41 45 49 55 MN 44 42 SD 43 50

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Wheat” 1986 – 2016 (0-24” lb/a) Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “WHEAT” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Wheat” (1986-2016) “Deep N” (24-48” lb/a) Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Barley” 1986 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Barley” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Sunflower” 1986 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Sunflower” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Drybeans” 1986 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Dry Beans” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Sugarbeets” 1986 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Sugarbeet” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Fallow” 1986 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Fallow” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate following Soybean in 2016 Fall 2016 samples MB 23 30 (lb/a 0-24” samples) 29 25 36 28 38 35 24 29 29 31 25 ND 27 29 28 22 27 32 MN 30 28 SD 30 31 24 27

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Soybeans” 1995 - 2016 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Soybeans” in 2016

Average Soil Nitrate following Corn in 2016 Fall 2016 samples MB (lb/a 0-24” samples) 28 47 53 41 37 51 ND 50 53 61 48 52 60 75 101 MN 51 SD 37 63 33 53

Average Soil Nitrate Following “Corn” 1997 – 2016 (Northwood Laboratory) Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a)

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Corn” in 2016

% Soil Samples with Phosphorus less than 10 ppm Fall 2016 samples MB 39% (0-6” samples) 39% (Olsen P test) 55% 60% 14% 73% 31% 23% 21% 71% 67% 71% 47% 69% 54% ND 45% 48% 51% 59% 62% 26% 61% 38% 50% MN 37% SD 41% 39% 49% 37% 35%

% Soil Samples with Potassium less than 150 ppm MB Fall 2016 samples 25% 13% (0-6” samples) 26% 26% 21% 6% 13% 10% 26% 5% 4% 1% 13% 36% 72% ND 8% 19% 59% 5% 41% 5% 46% 2% 5% 32% MN 33% SD 43% 1% 5% 35% 43%

% Soil Samples with Zinc less than 1.0 ppm MB Fall 2016 samples 47% 58% (0-6” samples) 62% 52% 26% 76% 44% 31% 33% 73% 81% 82% 41% 65% 34% ND 49% 70% 21% 77% 58% 53 19% 75% 44% 51% MN 27% SD 44% 57% 43% 38% 26%

% Soil Samples with Sulfur less than 15 lb/a MB Fall 2016 samples 16% 23% (0-6” samples) 16% 12% 9% 20% 25% 16% 16% 49% 21% 27% 13% 21% 52% ND 32% 76% 40% 21% 43% 52% 80% 67% 34% 49% MN 65% SD 90% 68% 44% 68% 88%

% Soil Samples with %OM less than 3.0% MB Fall 2016 Samples 8% 10% (0-6” samples) 21% 11% 34% 22% 34% 24% 25% 71% 33% 45% 26% 28% 37% ND 30% 60% 76% 29% 27% 35% 25% 55% 28% 13% MN 10% SD 9% 25% 29% 7% 4%

% Soil Samples with Chloride less than 40 lb/a MB Fall 2016 Samples 44% 39% (0-24” samples) 42% 63% 24% 80% 55% 37% 41% 84% 61% 69% 67% 45% 75% ND 64% 85% 54% 59% 86% 92% 90% 52% MN 62% 86% SD 61% 83% 75%

% Soil Samples with Copper less than 0.5 ppm MB Fall 2016 samples 12% 7% (0-6” samples) 28% 5% 31% 17% 18% 16% 22% 6% 15% 3% 23% 36% 36% ND 11% 56% 10% 30% 15% 14% 34% 16% 7% MN 6% 10% SD 6% 6% 4% 1%

% Soil Samples with Boron less than 0.4 ppm MB Fall 2016 samples 2% 1% (0-6” samples) 3% 1% 6% 2% 9% 2% 11% 3% 4% 2% 7% 8% 27% ND 4% 17% 34% 84% 4% 11% 57% 16% 13% 9% MN 14% SD 10% 36% 9% 11% 37%

% Soil Samples with Soil pH greater than 7.3 MB Fall 2016 samples 62% 94% (0-6” samples) 79% 72% 91% 69% 57% 73% 78% 72% 75% 54% 73% 96% 45% ND 43% 8% 43% 64% 78% 27% 47% 11% 17% MN 40% 55% SD 43% 16% 28% 30% 21%

% Soil Samples with Soil pH less than 6.0 MB Fall 2016 samples 2% 0% (0-6” samples) 4% 4% 0% 1% 15% 1% 7% 2% 1% 4% 6% 1% 11% ND 14% 34% 16% 3% 4% 13% 16% 17% 16% MN 9% 19% 13% SD 16% 18% 43% 10% 35%

% Subsoil Samples with pH less than 7.0 MB Fall 2016 samples 2% 1% (0-6” samples) 4% 3% 0% 2% 16% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 3% 1% 5% ND 3% 52% 5% 2% 1% 6% 9% 17% 9% MN 3% 3% 13% SD 29% 10% 6% 19% 19%

% Soil Samples with Carbonate greater than 5.0% MB Fall 2016 samples 30% 56% (0-6” samples) 25% 22% 19% 2% 14% 8% 33% 11% 7% 4% 17% 24% 5% ND 9% 11% 11% 26% 4% 10% 0% 1% MN 12% 26% SD 4% 2% 1% 10%

% Soil Samples with Salts greater than 1.0 MB Fall 2016 Samples 18% (0-6” samples) 13% 20% 19% 8% 4% 12% 20% 3% 15% 8% 24% 11% 6% ND 12% 4% 3% 19% 7% 2% 3% 19% MN 8% 3% SD 1% 2% 9% 1% 2%

North Dakota & NW Minnesota % Samples Testing with Salts greater than 1.0 582 Grand Forks 567 TRF 587 Minot 1:1 salt method – expressed as mmhos/cm

South Dakota - % Samples Testing with Salts greater than 1.0 1:1 salt method – expressed as mmhos/cm

Zip Code Areas For Soil Test Summaries ND MN SD